My guests this week are Joshua Garrity of Cane and Rinse, Neil Taylor of GameBurst and KDS 2.0 and Jerome McIntosh and Paul Gibson of Gonzo Planet. On the chopping block we have an extremely divisive depiction. Some will find it irritating, shallow, pointless and boring, others consider it a masterclass of camp humour. Will we manage a balanced view?

For those wishing to catch up on everything we’ll be reviewing, here is a handy checklist.

1. Batman The Movie (1966)
2. Batman (1989)
3. Batman Returns (1992)
4. Mask of the Phantasm (1993)
5. Batman Forever (1995)
6. Batman & Robin (1997)
7. Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker (2000) [Only iTunes in the UK]
8. Under the Red Hood (2010) [No Blu-Ray in the UK]
9. Year One (2011) [Only iTunes in the UK]
10. Arkham Asylum (2009) [360/PS3/PC]
11. Arkham City (2011) [360/PS3/PC]
12. Batman Begins (2005)
13. The Dark Knight (2008)
14. The Dark Knight Rises (2012) [Coming Christmas 2012]

Next week; Tim Burton’s Batman [1989]

Josh started life as a fan of many of the creators found on Gonzo Planet, but now finds himself rubbing shoulders with these extraordinaryly talented people. After guesting on such great podcasts as The Digital Cowboys and IDKFA, Josh first found his own voice through One-Winged Muffin, a blog focused on intelligent discussion on all things nerdy. Now Josh is a contributer on both the Cane and Rinse website and podcast, where you can find indepth and detailed analysis of video games.

Click here to see all of Josh’s work for Gonzo Planet.

Just to help you on your way…

We are all pretty aware of stereotypical representations in video games.  We have played as so many muscular, shaven headed white men that they all blur into one dull heroic mass.  Any time we see someone middle eastern, we’re pretty sure the only interaction with them will involve a squeeze of the right trigger.  Then there are the women; so many princesses rescued, so many unrealistically large breasts, tiny waists, pouting lips, come hither eyes, and jiggle physics.  The representation of women is a well worn but important topic that comes up time and again.  But one area where I always thought women were positively represented was Sci-fi video games.

As soon as you start looking you realise there’s a plethora of good characters out there.  Samus Aran first comes to mind.  Although most of her character is expressed through gameplay, there’s enough there to establish that she’s capable, intelligent and strong.  The Metroid games give off a sense of loneliness and isolation; in Super Metroid especially, through the music and methodical explorative gameplay.  We experience that isolation as Samus which lends her a sense of mystery; from her motivations, her lack of back story, and her decision to work alone.  Of all the people blasting aliens in powered armour, she’s probably the most interesting.

Of course there’s the issue of her sexualisation.  Even in her first game, she strips off at the end.  The shock people must have felt when they realised Samus was a woman was probably  undermined somewhat by her skimpy attire beneath the suit.  In Super Metroid, if you die her suit explodes off and she arches her back while the screen fades to white.  In motion, with the accompanying sound effect, there’s no doubt what the developers were invoking.  But unlike say, Lara Croft, who is likewise a strong and independent woman, exploring and shooting anything that moves, Samus, for the most part, wears appropriate attire.

The antagonist, Mother Brain is also interesting; not so much for her character, as there’s nothing really there, but the fact that she is a female (of sorts) is.  Powerful Matriarchs are a bit of a theme in Sci-fi games, making for some of the best antagonists.  It’s hardly a surprise that in the Mass Effect series, as well as having a strong cast of female characters (including the lead, if chosen), has Matriarchal figures as a typified part of its fiction.

The Matriarchal figure is often twisted or corrupted.   After Mother Brain, there was Shodan from System Shock 2.  Shodan is terrifying and cold.  She manipulates you at first, before revealing herself.  To her you’re an insect, or meat, and she is perfect; something she’s keen to remind you of.  Her creations have become unruly and in a perversion of the motherly role, wants you to destroy them.  For most of the game she’s a voice and a face, taunting you, until your final confrontation.  Which of course, brings up GlaDOS.  Shodan’s DNA is clearly running through GlaDOS, from the obvious technological similarities, to the fact that she manipulates and tricks you.  She’s less gloating, more sardonic, and her threats are more veiled.  She’s more subtle and humorous but no less terrifying.

These twisted versions of mothers, alien in form and filtered through technology are some of the most striking and interesting women in video games, but there are many other good women in Sci-Fi.  It would be remiss not to mention Alyx Vance, possibly one of the most loved female characters in video games.  Likewise, Judith Mossman, also from Half life 2, is complex and well rounded.  Chell, from Portal, although she doesn’t speak, has her character fleshed out through gameplay and what is said by others, particularly in Portal 2.  Jade from Beyond Good and Evil, Faith from Mirror’s Edge.  Even Kat from Halo Reach is quite interesting, though one gets the feeling that Bungie were putting all their minorities into one token character; a high ranking Hispanic female with a prosthetic limb.

The Halo series also has another striking female character: Cortana.  She was one of the best parts of the original Halo.  Master Chief is a typical heroic cipher, strong but mostly blank.   Cortana added that vital touch of personality.  Intelligent and witty, her comments often cut through the bloated machismo of Chief, and the game.  She’s the leader, giving the Master Chief and the player direction.  Without her, Chief would have blindly activated Halo after following orders from another female sounding machine, 343 Guilty Spark.  Chief is a weapon, a walking tank, but it’s Cortana who has the ideas.

As the series progressed she has slowly transformed.  In Halo, although not unattractive, she has clearly not been designed to be an object of desire.  She is firmly placed within the helper role.  In Halo 2, suddenly she has become more attractive, her hair is longer, and her body is more curved.  One could argue that it’s just because of a rise in visual fidelity, but there’s a definitely a shift taken place to make her more appealing.  But, on the whole her character is the same.  Halo 3 is where things go markedly downhill.  She’s even more curvaceous, attractive, so much so that she doesn’t resemble the original.  She’s more like Cortana’s sexy younger sister.  She spends most of the game trapped on a ship, but that doesn’t mean we don’t get flashes of her flouncing around at certain points in the game, and towards the end she has to be rescued.  In 3 games she’s gone from an intelligent and acerbic helper to just another princess.

Halo 4 will see the return of the Master Chief and Cortana.  Maybe she’ll be every bit the equal of Chief again, just like in the first Halo, but looking at the concept art of her from the cover of game informer and other recently revealed images is hardly encouraging.  Her lips are fuller, eyes larger and more defined, and her breasts are bigger.  Everything about her is softer and with it more sexualised.  Again, at this stage very little is known, so perhaps the concept art is misleading but it’s hard not to be concerned.  Cortana’s transformation hasn’t been sudden or jarring, but a slow erosion of what has made her valuable.  The Halo series’ story might not be prized, because it’s convoluted and badly told, but Cortana was one truly interesting aspect of it and it’s sad to see her become another sex object.

Science fiction is often a great context for interesting female characters.  We can imagine a utopian universe that isn’t sexist and where women are provably as powerful as men.  Female Shepherd is literally the equal of male Shepherd.  Women are often the antagonists of these universes, from Metroid’s Mother Brain to Gears of War’s Queen Myrrah and are often interesting because the basic enemies are usually male.  But, as with any female character, there’s the risk that, just to pander to the audience, the women will be sexualised.  Miranda and Samara in ME2 may be “strong” characters but respectively wear impractical high heels and reveal ridiculous amounts of cleavage.  Strong female characters don’t have to be sexless, (Bayonetta for example) but there’s a limit to how far one can push their visual representation and it still seem a believable character.  The tension in Science Fiction is that it can be used as means to explore interesting and unique ideas around gender (among many other topics), but it can also be an excuse to put women in a skin tight outfits or make sexy Holograms.

The wider issues around representation are still very much unsolved.  Many groups are still incredibly under-represented, or represented in an extremely limited way, and will be for a long time.  While there are good female characters to be found in every genre Science Fiction gives a measure of creative license that some of the more grounded genres do not.  With that there’s more opportunity for interesting, unique and boundary breaking characters.  Sci-Fi games aren’t necessarily the gateway to equal and positive representation of women in all video games but they are still hugely significant.  Some of the most interesting female characters yet in video games have come from Science Fiction and without a doubt many more will.

Dave is a part time moderator, who spends several hours a week deleting posts from the Call of Duty Facebook pages. It gives him plenty of time to think about video games and their fans, and to play an unhealthy amount of minesweeper. Very soon he’ll be organising video games tournaments across UK universities as well.

Click here to see all of David’s work for Gonzo Planet.

In this first and arguably best outing, directed by Ridley Scott, we take a look at a haunted house story set in space. A B-Movie creature feature, lent integrity from its serious tone, sparing and masterful handling of tension and significant influence on several genres.

This was the film that made British-born Scott a key player in Hollywood, introduced the world to Sigourney Weaver, created one of the most iconic females in cinema history and one of the most terrifying monsters.

I am joined at the helm of the Nostromo by Leah Haydu of GamerDork Versio 4.0, Joshua Garrity of Cane and Rinse, Sharon Shaw of Gonzo Planet, Matt Ramsey of DorkTunes and James Perkins of Geek Wad. My crew and I try our level best to maintain a serious and bolted down tone throughout but inadvertently drummed up some of the funniest moments on Digital Gonzo yet. Maybe even a few Gonzo meme’s already exist within the darkened corridors of this episode. Stay tuned to the very end for that reason.

Next week: ALIENS

Brand new, up-to-the minute NEWS brought to you by Gonzo Planet. This second installment is a report on this week’s crisis in Britain’s schools.

This episode features James Batchelor of GameBurst, Michael Fox of The Little Metal Dog Show and Sharon Shaw of Gonzo Planet.

Click on the player down the bottom

to hear the author reading an audio version of this article.

Let us know what you think of this style.

-By Neil Taylor

On 30th of April the UK high court ruled that The Pirate Bay must be blocked by UK ISPs. within a few days Virgin Media (my ISP) has blocked the web site. The British Phonographic Industry see this as a victory against piracy. I see this as breaking the internet. Now let me be clear, I don’t think you should pirate copyrighted material and if you are caught doing it, then yes you should be punished. however I feel that the steps taken by the government both here in the UK and in other countries are far too harsh.

Firstly, blocking one web site for an entire country isn’t going to stop piracy. If anything this is a P.R move and if the people at the BPI and other such groups think it will make a huge difference, then they are sadly deluding themselves. After seeing that virgin media had blocked the Pirate Bay it took one Google search to find 7 different links to the website, and that’s without using a VPN (virtual private network). so all that the high court has done is to made it just a little bit harder to get to the Pirate bay by about 10 seconds, for regular folks. Not really sure how that will stop piracy but hey ho the court has spoken and I guess they can always bring another case to block those URLS.

Blocking URLS to web sites is never going to work. The internet was designed to work around problems like that. You could always block on the DNS level (Domain Name System), but that’s when you really screw up how things work and mess with internet security. Let me try and explain that (the best I can and with the help of Wikipedia, so don’t shout at me too much if I get it wrong). The Domain Name System servers, sometimes likened to a telephone directory, translate browser requests for domain names into the IP address assigned to that computer or network. Now if you have a law like our old friend SOPA. The original bill requires these servers to stop referring requests for infringing domains to their assigned IP addresses. However DNS is robust by design against failure and requires that a lack of response is met by inquiries to other DNS servers. See the internet is designed so that blocked URLS and DNS’ are worked around.

There is another type of law that could be used to stop people from  pirating things. France has passed a three strikes law. According to the law, the first strike involves sending a message to any user who is believed to have infringed copyright online, with a repeat message sent on the second instance. When the authorities are informed of a third transgression, the user’s internet access could be closed down for a period of between two and 12 months – without judicial appeal. Now compared to laws or court orders that block URLs or DNS this law isn’t as bad, and cutting hardcore pirates off the internet seems to me to be a good idea. The thing is, this law isn’t set up to stop the harcore bootleggers. This is the kind of law that just gets the normal public cut off from the internet. You know the parents who have no idea how their computer works and the kids have installed Utorrent on there to get the latest films,TV or music.

One problem with this law is its wording, any user who is ‘believed’ to have infringed, not shown to have infringed in a court of law with evidence to back that claim up, but believed to have infringed.That to me is a scary way to word a law. I’m a big believer in Innocent until proven guilty but it seems these days in the eye’s of the entertainment industry we’re all guilty till proven innocent. The second and far bigger problem with this law is that ‘without judicial appeal’ bit. If you thought loose wording was bad, how about being accused of infringement and not being able at all to go to the court  and prove your innocence? ‘No due process for you, you’re a pirate because we say you are’. I can’t think of any other crime where they would cut you off of from your day in court. Yes we have fines for some crimes like speeding or littering but you’re still entitled to a day in court if you appeal against it.

I could spend even more of my time and yours talking about bad anti-piracy laws, but that’s the thing. We all like to bitch about how bad a law is, but maybe it’s time we stopped moaning about it, tried to enter into dialogue with the industry and come to some sort of compromise over the way we should handle piracy. Let not beat about the bush, a lot of us at some point in our lives have had something to do with piracy, and a lot of us have justified what we have done. That doesn’t change the fact that it was wrong and in some small way we have hurt the industries that we love, be it gaming, music or film. Is it as bad as the companies like to say? No, probably not. I do not believe that it’s like for like; that one film downloaded is a sale lost.
At some point all the casual piracy is going to have an effect and it would be better to stop it now than when it’s too late.

Here are a few thoughts on what could be done to cut down on piracy.

First off; distributors, stop splitting up the digital distribution market. We need one centralized place to go and find content. I don’t mean one place for Fox and another for Universal. How easy would it be to go to one place to find any movie you wanted and buy it there and then? Think iTunes or Netflix with every studio’s back catalog there at your fingertips.

Keep prices low. Now I really don’t have much of a problem with the pricing of DVDs when most new titles seem to be between £10 to £12. I’m ok with that. As for Blu-Ray, those prices do seem to be a little on the high side, although that could be because it hasn’t been around as long as DVD.

Here’s a good one, stop treating us all like criminals even when we’ve bought the damn film on disc. I cannot stand that anti-piracy ad that plays when I put in a DVD. I’ve bought your film, you have my money. So why are you treating me like I stole it. Also let us back up our DVD’s and Blu-Rays. We’ve bought the disk let us back it up as well. To be fair, now that digital files are easier to buy, backing up a disk may become something we do less of, if at all.

Don’t ask for unattainable high damages from people who are convicted of piracy. $1.92 million for infringing 24 songs is way beyond any normal person’s ability to pay. If it was a set limit of £100 per song that would still be very high but it’s a price people can wrap their head around.

And finally, here’s one for us. Stop justifying casual piracy. It’s still stealing. It doesn’t matter if it’s a TV show that hasn’t aired in your country, or a you’re trying a game out to see if you like it. You still took some thing without paying for it.

Will anything I’ve put forward stop piracy? No. What it may do is help cut back the levels of casual piracy, which in turn may stop it from becoming acceptable in everyday life. With the inexorable growth of the  internet, times are changing fast and it’s up to all of us to find a way of working out how we want things to be. Yes we can all rise up and try to stop pointless, ineffective or draconian laws from being passed, but what good is that when we don’t offer something else in return? It’ll just keep the cycle going of bad laws being put forward and us trying to fight back.

I don’t have the answers. Smarter people than me have talked for a long time about this and were still no closer to the answer, but hopefully I’ve given you a few things to think about.

Sources:
Stop Online Piracy Act wikki page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act#Technical_issues

France passes three strikes law against filesharers
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/may/13/france-three-strikes

The Pirate Bay must be blocked by UK ISPs, court rules
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17894176

Jury in RIAA Trial Slaps $2 Million Fine on Jammie Thomas
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/06/riaa-jury-slaps-2-million-fine-on-jammie-thomas/

Neil can be heard at a Radio Station just outside of Nottingham. He is the regular co-host of GameBurst and produces his own movie and game-focussed Kid Dogg Show; KDS 2.0.

Click here to see all of Neil’s work for Gonzo Planet.

This reminds me of an audio article I made for the second installment of Digital Gonzo. It was focused on the possible passing of a UK law that led to this very situation.

You can find it here.

It’s also rather interesting that if you swing by The Pirate Bay they have a big logo up that makes this endless scenario very clear.  – Alex Shaw

This is the second volume of the Gonzo Planet Audio Magazine compiling the continually growing library of audio articles. It also starts off with a very important announcement about the Gonzo Planetary Expo 2012.

The time-codes after each article here are for where they stop so if you want to skip to the end of a piece you’ll know where to land.

    1. [James Batchelor: GameBurst] The Nintendo Difference #2 – The 3DS 05.00
    2. [Alex Shaw: Digital Gonzo] The Internet News – Fire 19.30
    3. [Michael Fox: Little Metal Dog] Michael Gets Creative 22.50
    4. [James Perkins: Geek Wad] The Darkest Hour 3D – Review 27.00
    5. [Alex Shaw: Digital Gonzo] The 41-Year Old Virgin Who etc… Non-Review 32.20
    6. [Neil Taylor: KDS 2.0] The Dresden Files – Storm Front – Review 37.35
    7. [James Batchelor: GameBurst] The Nintendo Difference #3 – Resolutions 41.15
    8. [Michael Fox: Little Metal Dog] Michael Talks About Kickstarters 56.50
    9. [Alex Shaw & James Perkins] Wrecked: Revenge Revisited – Review 1-01.15
    10. [Alex Shaw: Digital Gonzo] Alex Reads The Gruffalo 1-09.45

Next week… ALIEN

As I left the cinema after seeing the Avengers I posted the following message to Twitter “Lord of the Rings… then Avengers. That is all.” Now this is a bold statement to make especially if you know me and how much I love the Lord of the Rings movies. But if you know me well you’ll also know I don’t say things like this lightly, with the following exceptions.

* “It’s not a very cinematic experience” Mars Attacks
* “That was really awesome.” Star Wars – Episode I: The Phantom Menace
* “They should have left the head-butting in the UK cut of…”: The Matrix
* “I think I may prefer this to the original. It’s like The Empire Strikes Back” Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest
* “I’m not sure which is the best film of 1997…”: L.A. Confidential or FACE/OFF
* “May I have a ticket please.”: Speed 2: Cruise Control

However I need to make myself clear here. I do not think The Avengers is the second-best film ever made on a technical scale. In the grand scheme of things there are hundreds of films far more accomplished with greater depth, stronger narrative, better action sequences, better scripting, directing, you name it.

This is not about technical proficiency, it is about how this film jumps straight into my number two slot, where it will remain standing proud for I would imagine a very long time.

This is about what the Avengers symbolises, not what happens onscreen, but what it took to make those things happen. Not what goes on, but what went on. For the same reason that Lord of the Rings is cemented in at number one because of it’s wonderful, challenging, emotionally charged production and the team of immensely talented, passionate people involved in that, I love Avengers because it brings me dreams to life.

We’ve seen heroes onscreen since before we had screens. This dates back to the first stories told by the fireside of our forefathers. Epic adventure with demigods facing unspeakable evil. Beowulf, Hercules and of course Thor himself. Conflicts replicated again and again throughout our history, retold through the filters of theatre, music, literature, radio, film, television and video and tabletop games. Heroes saving the world are nothing new. If I ask you to think back to silver screen representations of comic book heroes your thoughts may swing to Superman by Donner, Batman by Burton, but as we’ve discussed, these representations go far back to the pulp heroes of serial adventures.

Avengers doesn’t say anything new about whether the world NEEDS heroes. These are themes handled more deftly in The Dark Knight,Watchmen and Hancock.

Even the combination of heroes from multiple stories has been done before to atrocious effect in The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen.

No, Avengers does something that due to budgets, licensing, time and technology constraints and all those other shitty constructs of the reality of civilisation that keep our dreams from coming true have been impossible up until now: It assembles heroes we already know well and mixes them into one glorious, explosive cocktail with a taste right out of Marvel’s most epic crossovers.

That in itself would be an achievement, but to do it with such effortless style, such assured confidence, such knowledge of the cores of these characters and such unmistakable heart that can only come from a Browncoat hammers this one into the stratosphere.

It is one thing to see Spider-Man fight Green Goblin in the center of Manhattan. That’s frankly to be expected. But in Marvel’s comics, since the dawn of the Silver age, some fifty years ago while reading Spidey stories, other heroes from other comics would visit him, chat with him, often fight with him and otherwise establish some form of connection. This made the Marvel comic universe seem richer, fuller and populated with special individuals and groups, far too numerous for one book. It also subtly cross-pollinated the titles. If you meet Daredevil for the first time reading Spider-Man then maybe you pick up his book next time you go to the comic store.

My dreams as a child featured Hulk tear-assing his way around new York, smashing all and sundry with Spider-Man, battling his rogues gallery alongside Iceman and Firestar his Amazing Friends. The cartoons of the 80’s and more specifically the 90’s produced by Marvel without the licensing issues that plagued the cinematic outings had it right on the money. These heroes shared a world and visited one another. Of course in my dreams they were accompanied by Optimus Prime, the Centurions, Bravestarr, He-Man, Bananaman and indeed Supergran and I accept that’s an onscreen unlikelihood outside of Robot Chicken, Family Guy and South Park’s Imaginationland.
But for the longest time even the unified Marvel universe could never happen in a film. The chains of licensing hold creativity back. It would have been unthinkable in 2002 for Sony to feature Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine in their Spider-Man film, he was attached to the X-Men, whose license to all characters was retained by Fox. Hulk, owned by Universal could never come bounding in to help take out Doctor Octopus in the sequel and Daredevil owned by Fox again sure as hell couldn’t help Peter take out Venom and Sandman at the end of Spidey 3. Even today the X-Men and Spidey have been retained by those studios barring them from near-future crossover potential.

The first five films we have covered showed us that these characters could potentially intersect. Middlemen from SHIELD like Nick Fury and the great Phil Coulson would interact with multiple heroes and a broader scope was hinted at than the confines of a simple origin story of a classic Marvel hero. Now for the past few days we’ve actually been able to see the world, and it’s delivered in a fashion that’s so bright and beautiful, so dark and scary, so joyous, luscious, charming, clever, funny and thrilling that I did not want to leave my seat.

Yes... we all do.

To those leveling issues of shallowness at this origin story, here’s some unnecessarily deep deconstruction reading ten times into the characters than the great Stanley Lieberman ever imagined.

Each Avenger is a different aspect of warfare through the ages.

• Hawkeye is the lone, skilled sharpshooter, a dedicated, one-man arsenal.
• Black Widow is espionage, the lethal application of duplicity and social camouflage.
• Iron Man is ingenuity, human frailty nullified by galvanising technological superiority.
• Captain America is flag-waving patriotism and the inspiration of hearts and minds.
• Thor is the untouchable champion to venerate and also the notion of divine providence.
• Nick Fury is the seasoned general imparting only what his men need to know to win.
• And Hulk is the devastating force wrought by science, their atomic bomb.

It’s entirely appropriate that these titans would not meet unless their world could not survive without them. Their awe-inspiring abilities when combined eclipse the Autobots and even the crew of the Nebuchadnezzar, finally delivering an action film with the sort of building-leveling box-office cache with a clever brain for the first time this century. This saving the world from annihilation by alien forces taps into the beginnings of Sci-Fi in 50’s B-Movies, effectively performing exactly the same task as the Transformers films only rather than expertly coiffured, lecherous, ten-thumbed, simpleton Michael Bay at the helm, we get a man who has been adored by geeks everywhere since Sarah Michelle Gellar staked her first vampire. A man who has proved his aptitude for characterisation and sparkling dialogue, along with the balanced juggling of extensive gangs of heroes. Not only does he prove absolutely up to the task, but takes to this aspect of the Marvel cinematic universe so well that you wonder what the fuck the studios were doing giving the X-Men to Brett Ratner and the Fantastic Four to Tim Story.

Its success as a mainstream hit is admirable as well, delivering the spectacle that people flock to the works of Bay, Verbinski, and Emmerich for, but with the dry wit of an independent film seen by hundreds.

No, on a technical level it’s not better than The Dark Knight, but did I enjoy it more? Will I watch it again and again on Blu Ray until my machine spits it out in disgust? Will it give form to my new dreams? The answer is a resounding yes.

It is the story of exceptional men and one woman who have an uneasy relationship with the wider world trying to find their place alongside one another for the common good. It is a film about channeling the grandstanding ego and the chaotic id with the guiding force of the superego. It’s a film about the supreme unlikelihood of these converging forces meeting and actually not destroying one another. It’s a film about how trust can be earned through conflict and resolution. But most of all it’s a film about a world where when terrible things happen and cruel men seek to subjugate us, there are people there in the brightest colours to shield us, to save us and to Avenge us. A world we have read about for decades, and now seems that much more Marvelous.

When not writing for this website Alex is a billionaire, genius, playboy philanthropist… well one out of four’s not bad.

See all of Alex’s work for Gonzo Planet here.

This is actually the first ever Gonzo show I’ve recorded where myself, my guests and the rest of the world have only just seen the film in question for the first time. in fact it launches in the USA tonight. This makes for a slightly different discussion, not least because this is also the culmination of four years of waiting, longer if you’re a Marvel fan. It is also a new beginning for comic book movies and my theory is that in twenty years this will be seen as one of the first truly successful crossovers.

Joining me once again are Neil Taylor of GameBurst and KDS 2.0, Josh Garrity of Cane and Rinse and Jerome McIntosh and Paul Gibson of Gonzo Planet. Some of the things we didn’t mention on the show that need mentioning…

1. The Helicarrier was awe-inspiring.
2. Black Widow did her fighting without high-heeled shoes again and in fact pointedly picked them up afterwards.
3. It would appear that the Americans get a brief post-credits Easter-Egg so stick around until the very end. That goes for this spoiler-packed podcast as well.

In the next few days, the second Gonzo Planet Audio Magazine show, along with a very important announcement about the Gonzo Planetary Expo 2012. Then next week a whole new long-running film series gets reviewed.

I love stealth.  Ever since I first played Metal Gear Solid the idea of sneaking around undetected has appealed to me.  One of the reasons is that I find it so captivating is that stealth, along with survival horror, can make you feel truly underpowered yet gripped because of it.  You are weak and if they find you you are going to die.  So when you do avoid, outwit or toy with the enemies the resultant joy is enormous.

Stealth also creates enjoyment from pacifism.  While there is a certain anarchic thrill to be had from attaching C4 to the backs of guards in Metal Gear, or electrocuting enemies in the old Splinter Cells, the biggest buzz I always got was from going through an area leaving the enemies untouched, without them ever knowing I was there.  To get the Silent Assassin ranking in the Hitman games one has to kill only the target.  The thrill isn’t in the moment of violence itself but in walking away calmly while all those around know nothing, or think there’s been an accident.

Consequently, taking a life is given more weight in stealth games over others.  In many games, violence is your only recourse so killing can become meaningless.  It’s telling that the Metal Gear Solid games allow the player to go through and, for the most part not kill anyone.  Each kill is a choice, or an indictment of a lack of subtlety and every body left lying on the ground is a consequence to be dealt with.  Every neck snapped or bullet fired is laden with meaning.

There’s been a shift relatively recently in stealth games which has changed the nature of what stealth feels like.  In old stealth games, despite being able to perform fantastic feats the representation of the player was nevertheless as weak; you are prey, hiding because you are vulnerable and can not win by going to head to head.  The player is now no longer made to feel fearful of being found, but powerful in their capacity to take down enemies at their whim.

Take the most recent Splinter Cell, Conviction.  In Conviction Sam’s movement is completely different to his previous games.  His low methodical crawl between each shadow has become a series of sprints and leaps.  His engagement with the enemy has changed too.  There are still stealth take downs, but their brutality has been ramped up.  After these the player is able to ‘mark and execute’ several enemies in quick succession, clearing a room with a few precise headshots.  Sometimes its best to reveal oneself, the last known location appearing as a ghostly image which enemies run to, enabling the player to run around behind them.  Whatever one thinks of the quality of the game or these new mechanics, one thing is certain; Sam Fisher is no longer, as the tag line for the original game reads “like a sliver of glass, small, sharp and nearly invisible,” he’s loud, brash and violent.

Assassin’s Creed has also gone through an interesting shift.  Initially billed as social stealth, each kill would involve investigation about the target and his routines.  The assassination would involve getting close, hidden in the throng of the crowd before pouncing.  After killing the mark and causing an uproar you had to flee using your parkour skills to lose your pursuers.  Though you were deadly, the emphasis was on evasion through blending with the crowd.  Once revealed, the only solution was to flee.  However, as the series has continued the focus on evasion has shifted subtly.  Stealth is still present, but the representation of Ezio and the Assassins is as less vulnerable than before.

The game’s combat system has evolved, counters leading to chaining kills which let Ezio and the player take enemies head on.  So while the approach may be initially stealthy, the player is in much less danger when they reveal themselves as they are equipped to fight head on.  This transition is eloquently demonstrated by the trailers.  Assassin’s Creed’s showed Altair at a public execution, working his way through the crowd before striking, then running away and losing his enemies in a crowd of monks.  Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood’s however shows Ezio marching brazenly towards his enemy, his white robe clearly marking him out against a sea of others in red.  He reveals himself completely in the open, and after his assassin compatriots join him run at the enemy in a full frontal attack.  The Revelations trailer goes even further, with Ezio fighting a huge group single-handedly.  So much for subtlety.

Batman has always been represented as somewhat of a predator, so it’s unsurprising to see him in the empowered role he has in the Arkham games.  As Batman, the player is in complete control.  In the stealth sections the player can watch on high, completely safe as they see the thugs beneath them fall into panic and disarray.  Compare this to Manhunt, a stealth game where the player is likewise hunting enemies.  Despite the ostensible similarity Manhunt kept reminding the player that they were not in control.  Between each drawn out kill, the player cowers in the shadows as the groups of enemies goad and taunt you, and your tormentor whispers in your ear, reminding you that you’re being watched and played with.

The difference is control.  In Batman, Conviction and Assassin’s Creed the player controls and shapes the situation to their benefit, while in Metal Gear, the old Splinter Cells, Thief, Manhunt etc, the player works within it.  It’s a subtle difference but one that has enormous ramifications for the way the player feels.  When the player is seen in Metal Gear Solid, panic ensues.  Enemies fill the environment, actively searching the area for you.  With the radar gone and enemies everywhere, the player is extremely vulnerable so hides until it calms down.  When the player is seen in Conviction, they either swiftly take the enemy down with a quick headshot, or use it to their advantage.  In Batman, they use a gadget, knock them out or at worst grapple to safety, leaving the enemies rattled for the encounter.  In Assassin’s Creed, the player can choose to counter enemy upon enemy, handling huge groups with ease, or kill them with help of their brotherhood.  The player runs to stop the fight continuing endlessly, not because you can’t survive.  What this means is that there is now much less fear of being found in stealth games.

Part of the reason for this tonal change is that new mechanics have been brought in which make the genre more accessible.  Characters in this new breed of stealth move faster.  Even crawling silently, Batman streaks across the environment and can easily escape approaching enemies.  Contrast that experience with moving silently in MGS3.  One has to either crawl or walk at an agonisingly slow pace so if one hopes to move silently, the route has to be planned to avoid detection.

In addition many games now have a some form of ‘special’ vision;  In Batman it’s detective vision, Assassin’s Creed it’s eagle, and Sam gets a new pair of goggles half way through his game.  Even the upcoming Hitman game is adopting a version of it.  While they have their own quirks one of their common features is to mark out enemies so they’re easily visible, sometimes through walls.  The idea is that with this vision mode the player is informed about the whereabouts of the enemies in a simple way enabling them to approach the situation at hand, rather than first having to establish the location and routine of the enemies.  In some ways it’s an elegant solution to a problem which has plagued stealth games for a long time; rounding a corner and accidentally bumping into a guard.  This could ruin a whole section and lead to frustration.  But scouting an environment and establishing where the enemies are was also another facet of the gameplay in old stealth games, and has effectively been cut out, or at the very least stripped back.

The omnispective nature of stealth heroes moves the genre closer towards predation, as does another trend; violence being encouraged.  In Batman the player can often not leave an area until it’s cleared of enemies.  The enemies aren’t an obstacle towards your goal to be negotiated in a way you see fit but the goal itself.  Then again, this fits with Batman’s ethos and was also true of Manhunt.  But more disquieting is Splinter Cell’s change in this direction.  Mark and execute implies that you should clear a room rather than to try and get through without killing anyone.  Compare this to the old Splinter Cells; the non lethal take downs where you simply hit them over the head with your pistol, the knockout gas, distraction cameras or most controversially, avoiding them all together.  Trigger a takedown in conviction and more often than not it will involve a bullet.  Conviction mechanically implies murder is ok and the ideal option when going through an area.

After hearing this one might assume the changes I’ve listed here are bad in my opinion.  That I’m clinging on to my memories of Metal Gear Solid and acting the Luddite of the stealth genre.  It’s not that any of these changes individually are bad; anything the genre can do to make itself more accessible is a good thing, and with regard the games, Batman is meant to be predatory, Conviction was probably massively less frustrating for a lot of people than the originals, and Assassin’s Creed only seems to get better the further away it gets from its original concept, plus its multiplayer feels more true to the concept of social stealth than the single player ever did.  The problem is representational.  That while one could argue that the games have improved mechanically they have lost something.  They no longer put you in a underpowered role, and don’t seem to want to encourage passive or pacifist play and it’s that that I find somewhat disappointing.

There are so many games out there which make you feel like a hero and where you kill everything in sight that it’s sad to see stealth become another variation among them.  I used to enjoy stealth games because it could induce a thrill from a guard simply walking right by me unawares, knowing that he could bring in reinforcements or kill me in an instant.  It’s this fear that’s been lost and which I’d like to return.  Sometimes it’s more fun to hide than to seek.

Dave is a part time moderator, who spends several hours a week deleting posts from the Call of Duty Facebook pages. It gives him plenty of time to think about video games and their fans, and to play an unhealthy amount of minesweeper. Very soon he’ll be organising video games tournaments across UK universities as well.

Click here to see all of David’s work for Gonzo Planet.